The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

Monday, December 3, 2012

Israel’s Settlements and the Europeans

by Jonathan S. Tobin

Those looking for an explanation for why almost
all of Europe backed the Palestinians in the recent vote to upgrade
their status at the United Nations are blaming it on Israel’s decision
to continue building homes in Jerusalem and its suburbs. As reporter
Laura Rozen put it in a tweet,
“Does Israel really not get how fed up Europe is w/ its settlement
policies?” The upshot of this sort of thinking is that Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu’s fanatical devotion to “Greater Israel” is isolating
Israel and forcing even its friends to abandon its cause in
international forums.

The problem with this thesis is that it is pure bunk. As Jonathan Schanzer and Benjamin Weinthal point out in their article in Foreign Policy
(about which Rozen was commenting), there are a lot of reasons why the
Europeans stabbed the Israelis in the back at the UN, among which their
objections to “settlements” is by no means inconsiderable. But as I pointed out
earlier, if the Europeans believe that the 1967 lines with land swaps
is the formula for peace, it’s hard to understand why they are upset
with Israel building in places that everyone knows they would keep under
such a plan. After all, does anyone who is actually interested in
peace–as opposed to those who think every Jewish home anywhere in the
country is an illegal settlement–actually think Israel will abandon
40-year-old Jerusalem neighborhoods or the suburbs that are close to the
green line? Far from the Israelis pushing the limits in their quest for
settlements, it is the Europeans who are redefining the terms of peace.

For Israel’s European critics, “Greater Israel” is no longer all of
the West Bank, which even Netanyahu has conceded may be ceded for a real
peace deal, nor even retention of an undivided Jerusalem. They are now
acting as if any Israeli government that acts as if it is going to hold
onto all of the Jewish areas of Jerusalem is a foe of peace. In doing
so, they are not only distorting Israel’s position — which is still
perfectly compatible with a two-state solution based on the ’67 lines
with swaps — but also covering up or ignoring the fact that the
Palestinians have refused Israeli offers of a state and now no longer
even wish to negotiate.

The idea that the Europeans — save for the principled stand of the
Czech Republic — have turned on the Israelis solely because of
“settlements” is a misnomer. The tilt toward the Palestinians and
against Israel is not a recent phenomenon, nor is it the product of
Netanyahu’s tenure as prime minister. Virtually any act of Israeli
self-defense is treated as impermissible. Nor can one understand the
unwillingness of these governments to stand with Israel outside of a
context in which anti-Zionism has become the orthodoxy of European
intellectuals and the rising tide of anti-Semitism on the continent.

Moreover, as Schanzer and Weinthal point out, the decision to back
Mahmoud Abbas at the UN has just as much if not more to do with the hope
that giving him a shot in the arm will undermine Hamas. This is a
monumental misjudgment, since Abbas cannot hope to compete in the long
run with the more violent Islamists who run what is already an
independent Palestinian state in all but name.

Europeans who think isolating Israel in this manner will teach
Netanyahu or the Israeli people a lesson are ignoring the realities of
the conflict. Though they would divest themselves of almost all of the
territories in exchange for an end to the conflict, the overwhelming
majority of Israelis have no intention of allowing the West Bank to
become another, more dangerous version of Gaza from which Islamist
terrorists will launch missiles or terror attacks. A European demand for
an Israeli withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines including a divided
Jerusalem and the eviction of nearly half a million Jews from their
homes to empower a Palestinian entity that won’t negotiate is
antithetical to the idea of genuine peace.Jonathan S. TobinSource: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/12/02/israels-settlements-and-the-europeans-un-vote/Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.